Restore PBN from archive or start fresh?

[classybabe]

This is a question that's been bugging me. Which way would yield me the best results?

Restoring from waybackmachine has the benefit that the site looks legit and it ranks quickly for what it used to rank before. I don't care about copyright issue and neither is it a concern as this happening is extremely rare. The old links don't disappear as much.

On the other hand, repurposing and posting fresh content related to my niche obviously has the benefit that it's relevant.

How do people here do their PBNs? Restore or start fresh?. Which yields the best results?

 

[Starblazer]

If the sites have authority and quality backlinks, then it's better to restore them and deal with any issues later.

 

[Vicetemple]

It might be best to restore it to the old state, recreate it as closely as possible, and start pushing the new content. If you want to switch a niche, make sure it's a relevant transition. Subtle, with a logical connection between the theme of the website and the OBL.

 

[Nargil]

Well, first I would get domains that are niche relevant to begin with, then restore them with Archivarix, let them age for a few months and then you can add content that's related to your money site.

Same can be done with domains that are not entirely niche relevant. This is the no brainer choice if you do not care about breaking possible copyright.

 

[classybabe]

I should have been a bit clearer. What I mean to ask is which passes more link juice/increase rankings better?

 

[hadeeclick]

It might be best to restore it to the old state, recreate it as closely as possible, and start pushing the new content. If you want to switch a niche, make sure it's a relevant transition. Subtle, with a logical connection between the theme of the website and the OBL.

Hi sorry to ask. But when u mean close to as possible. Do you mean same theme? Or just content and link structure.

 

[fasttrak]

I should have been a bit clearer. What I mean to ask is which passes more link juice/increase rankings better?

The reason we restore old sites is to gain Google trust in the domain as quickly as possible. Restoring and letting it age is the best option, then once you have Google's trust, keep the pages which have decent links, delete the rest and build out everything else to fit your chosen money site idea.

Simples.

 

[fasttrak]

Well, first I would get domains that are niche relevant to begin with, then restore them with Archivarix, let them age for a few months and then you can add content that's related to your money site.

I had not come across Archivarix before. Thanks for that.

 

[hadeeclick]

The reason we restore old sites is to gain Google trust in the domain as quickly as possible. Restoring and letting it age is the best option, then once you have Google's trust, keep the pages which have decent links, delete the rest and build out everything else to fit your chosen money site idea.

Simples.

Does it have to resemble the theme as well? Or can just use generatepress. Restore URL structure and have same content. Thanks

 

[fasttrak]

Design does not matter as long as it ticks all of Google's Core Web Vitals boxes and is fast.

 

[blackbeans]

If you're just thinking in terms of short-term gains, storing content using the Wayback machine makes a lot of sense.

Of course, this assumes that the Wayback machine has decently archived whatever site you're trying to restore.

This is not always the case.

But thinking long-term, this might be a counter-productive strategy when you can just use whatever link equity the site that you are reviving has.

The great benefit of that is that it's linking to you using contextual content.

This difference is huge because you have to think about potential future updates.

Relevance is crucial. It may not be obvious now, but you don't want to find out the hard way later on after you've invested all this time, effort, and resources into your PBN.

 

[gabusam]

If you're just thinking in terms of short-term gains, storing content using the Wayback machine makes a lot of sense.

Of course, this assumes that the Wayback machine has decently archived whatever site you're trying to restore.

This is not always the case.

But thinking long-term, this might be a counter-productive strategy when you can just use whatever link equity the site that you are reviving has.

The great benefit of that is that it's linking to you using contextual content.

This difference is huge because you have to think about potential future updates.

Relevance is crucial. It may not be obvious now, but you don't want to find out the hard way later on after you've invested all this time, effort, and resources into your PBN.

Could you please elaborate on that? I am not sure what you mean by "you can just use whatever link equity the site that you are reviving has" .. Do you mean just use redirect? Or something else?

 

[Digital Knight94]

I should have been a bit clearer. What I mean to ask is which passes more link juice/increase rankings better?

If the site is relevant it is worth restoring, but check for the spam links in the backlink history. if there are good. you can use the old articles and the domain ratings.

if not it is always better to go with new sites to build from the scratch.